The Slayer Rule Explained: Inheritance Law (2026)

What Is the Slayer Rule in Inheritance Law?

The slayer rule bars anyone who feloniously and intentionally kills another person from inheriting any property, life insurance, retirement benefit, or financial interest connected to that person's death. Courts treat the killer as legally predeceased — erasing them from every inheritance channel simultaneously. The rule applies whether or not a criminal conviction exists.

Key takeaways

• The slayer rule operates in civil probate court under a "preponderance of the evidence" standard, not the criminal "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard — acquittal at trial does not guarantee inheritance rights.
• The rule reaches non-probate assets: life insurance proceeds, 401(k)s, IRAs, payable-on-death accounts, and joint tenancy survivorship rights are all covered under Uniform Probate Code § 2-803.
• California Probate Code § 259 extends the rule to elder abuse — physical, financial, or neglect — not just homicide.
• Most states allow the killer's innocent children to inherit by representation; Maryland and a handful of others block even the killer's descendants.
• Every gap the slayer rule exposes — no contingent beneficiary, no backup executor, a joint tenancy with no succession plan — is a preventable estate planning failure.

---

How the Slayer Rule Actually Works in Probate

The foundational American case is Riggs v. Palmer, 115 N.Y. 506 (1889). Elmer Palmer, age 16, poisoned his grandfather to lock in an inheritance before the grandfather could update his will. New York had no explicit statute on point. The Court of Appeals refused to let him inherit anyway, writing: "No one shall be permitted to profit by his own fraud, or to take advantage of his own wrong, or to acquire property by his own crime." That equitable principle became the common law slayer rule, and it has since been codified in statute in virtually every state.

The modern framework is Uniform Probate Code § 2-803, titled "Effect of Homicide on Intestate Succession, Wills, Trusts, Joint Assets, Life Insurance, and Beneficiary Designations." A majority of states have adopted it in whole or in part. The UPC's core command: a person who "feloniously and intentionally kills the decedent forfeits all benefits" — and is treated as having disclaimed or predeceased the victim for every purpose.

The critical distinction most people miss is the proof standard. Criminal court requires guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. A probate court invoking the slayer rule needs only preponderance of the evidence — more likely than not. Someone acquitted of murder can walk out of criminal court and still lose the inheritance in a subsequent probate proceeding. The O.J. Simpson civil judgment illustrated exactly this principle: criminal acquittal, civil liability. The same evidentiary gap applies in probate.

A criminal conviction, by contrast, works in the opposite direction: under Florida Stat. § 732.802(5), "a final judgment of conviction of murder in any degree is conclusive" — no separate probate finding is required.

Three elements must be present for the slayer rule to fire:

1. Felonious — the killing must constitute a serious crime. Murder and voluntary manslaughter qualify in most states. Negligent homicide and involuntary manslaughter generally do not, because intent is absent.
2. Intentional — the killer must have meant to cause death. A fatal DUI, even if charged as a felony, typically lacks the intent element.
3. Without legal justification — valid self-defense and defense of others are outside the rule's reach.

If any element is missing, the rule does not apply. A child who causes a parent's death in a genuine accident keeps the inheritance.

---

Which Assets Does the Slayer Rule Cover?

The rule extends far beyond a formal will. Every channel through which money could flow to the killer is blocked.

Asset Type	What Normally Happens	What the Slayer Rule Does
Will bequest	Passes to named beneficiary	Gift lapses; passes to alternate/residuary beneficiary or via intestacy
Intestate share	Passes by state default rules	Killer treated as predeceased; next heir takes
Life insurance	Pays named beneficiary outside probate	Killer disqualified; contingent beneficiary takes, or proceeds go to estate
401(k) / IRA	Passes by beneficiary designation	Killer disqualified; contingent beneficiary takes, or goes to estate
Joint tenancy (JTWROS)	Survivor takes full ownership	Survivorship right severed; killer keeps their own half, victim's half passes to estate
Payable-on-death account	Passes to named designee	Killer disqualified; passes to contingent or estate
Fiduciary role (executor, trustee)	Killer administers estate	Killer removed; court appoints substitute
Power of appointment	Killer exercises power	Power void; property passes as if killer predeceased

ERISA-governed retirement plans add a layer of complexity because federal law generally preempts state statutes. Federal courts have resolved this by holding that federal common law incorporates the slayer rule's principle even when the plan documents are silent — the killer cannot collect pension or 401(k) benefits regardless.

---

A Fully Worked Example: One Estate, Four Asset Types

The abstract rule becomes concrete when you trace it through a real asset structure. Consider Helen, 68, and her son Marcus.

Helen's estate:

• Home held in joint tenancy with right of survivorship with Marcus: $600,000 (each holds 50%)
• 401(k): $250,000; Marcus is primary beneficiary, his sister Claire is contingent beneficiary
• Life insurance policy: $400,000; Marcus is the sole beneficiary, no contingent named
• Investment portfolio: $350,000; passes under Helen's will to Marcus as sole beneficiary, no alternate named

Marcus is convicted of Helen's murder.

What happens, in a UPC-model state:

Asset	Pre-slayer outcome	Post-slayer outcome	Why
Home ($600,000)	Marcus inherits Helen's half automatically	Joint tenancy severed. Marcus keeps his own $300,000; Helen's $300,000 goes to her estate	Fla. Stat. § 732.802(2); UPC § 2-803 severing rule
401(k) ($250,000)	Marcus collects as primary beneficiary	Marcus disqualified; Claire collects as contingent	Contingent beneficiary designation saved this asset
Life insurance ($400,000)	Marcus collects outside probate	Marcus disqualified; no contingent named → proceeds go to Helen's estate	Without a contingent, proceeds enter probate
Portfolio under will ($350,000)	Passes to Marcus outright	Marcus treated as predeceased; no alternate named → passes via intestacy to Claire	Will had no backup beneficiary

Helen's estate now holds $300,000 + $400,000 = $700,000 in assets that must be administered through probate, with no clear will instructions covering this scenario — because Helen's will only named Marcus. Claire may ultimately inherit by intestacy, but distribution is delayed, estate tax on the 401(k) rollover is triggered, and attorney fees accrue for the probate proceeding that a few drafting choices could have prevented.

The one bright spot: the $250,000 401(k) passed cleanly to Claire because a contingent beneficiary was named. That single planning decision saved $250,000 from the probate mess.

---

How the Slayer Rule Differs by State

State variations are significant. The table below covers key jurisdictions.

State	Primary Authority	Standard of Proof (no conviction)	Elder Abuse Extension	Killer's Descendants Inherit?
California	Cal. Prob. Code §§ 250–259	Preponderance	Yes — § 259 (clear & convincing)	Generally no through killer's forfeited share (anti-lapse statute excluded)
Florida	Fla. Stat. § 732.802	"Greater weight of evidence"	No statutory extension	Yes — innocent beneficiaries protected
New York	Common law (Riggs v. Palmer, 1889)	Preponderance	No statutory extension	Generally yes, by representation
Virginia	Va. Code §§ 64.2-2500–2515	Preponderance or conviction	No	Generally yes
Michigan	Mich. Comp. Laws § 700.2803	Preponderance	No	Generally yes (UPC model)
Maryland	Common law + statute	Preponderance	No	No — harsher rule blocks descendants too
Texas	Narrow: mostly Insurance Code	Criminal conviction required for most property	No	N/A for most probate assets
Georgia	OCGA § 53-4-12	Clear and convincing evidence	No	Yes, but capped at killer's proportionate share

Two states deserve special attention:

Maryland imposes the strictest version. Not only is the killer disinherited, but in many circumstances the killer's descendants also cannot inherit through the killer's now-voided share. A $50,000 bequest forfeited by a Maryland slayer typically falls into the residuary estate — even the grandchildren of the victim do not step into the killer's shoes if they would be inheriting through him.

California goes further than any other state by extending the rule beyond homicide. California Probate Code § 259 allows a court to strip inheritance rights from anyone proved by clear and convincing evidence to have physically abused, neglected, or financially exploited a dependent adult or elder who subsequently died. The abuser need not have caused the death — only exploited the victim during their life. If you are in California or Florida with an aging parent, this matters right now.

Texas is the outlier in the other direction. The Texas Constitution contains a prohibition on "corruption of blood or forfeiture of estate" by conviction, which has historically made a general slayer statute difficult to enact. Texas does restrict life insurance proceeds when a beneficiary is convicted of willfully causing the insured's death, through its Insurance Code — but the probate implications for wills and intestate succession are less clear-cut than in most other states.

---

What the Slayer Rule Reveals About Your Estate Plan

Here is the thesis that no other slayer rule article makes: every scenario where the slayer rule creates chaos is a preview of exactly what happens when any beneficiary predeceases you unexpectedly. The slayer rule is the most extreme version of a much more common problem — a named beneficiary who simply isn't there when the estate settles.

The slayer rule is, in effect, an X-ray of your estate plan's single points of failure. Three specific fixes close the gaps it exposes.

Fix 1: Name a contingent beneficiary on every non-probate asset. Life insurance policies, 401(k)s, IRAs, and payable-on-death accounts pass entirely outside your will. If your primary beneficiary is disqualified by the slayer rule — or dies before you — and no contingent is named, those funds typically fall into your estate and go through probate, which is slower, more expensive, and subject to your creditors. Every beneficiary designation form has a "contingent beneficiary" field. Fill it in. This is the single highest-leverage fix in your entire estate plan. You can learn more about how designations interact with your will in our guide to beneficiary designations vs. wills.

Fix 2: Name an alternate executor and trustee. The slayer rule strips the disqualified person of fiduciary roles automatically. If your named executor is the same person who is your primary beneficiary, and that person is suddenly removed from both roles, the court appoints a stranger to administer your estate. Name a backup executor in your will — someone who is not also a primary beneficiary.

Fix 3: Write a residuary clause and name a residuary beneficiary. If a specific bequest lapses — because the beneficiary died, was disqualified, or disclaimed — where does the gift go? Without a clear residuary clause, it passes by intestacy, which may contradict your intent entirely. A residuary clause collects all such lapsed or unclaimed gifts and routes them to a named fallback heir. Most people's wills name a residuary beneficiary; fewer people name an alternate residuary beneficiary if the primary residuary beneficiary also predeceases. Add both.

If you want to see how the pieces fit together for your state, create your will online — Pactlio's guided interview prompts you for contingent beneficiaries, alternate executors, and a residuary clause as part of the standard workflow, and produces execution instructions specific to your state.

The simultaneous death clause addresses a related edge case: what happens if you and your beneficiary die close together in a common accident. Used alongside thoughtful contingent designations, it closes the final loop the slayer rule exposes.

---

Common Mistakes to Avoid

• Naming only one beneficiary everywhere. A single named beneficiary on every account creates a domino effect if that person is disqualified or predeceases you. Add contingents on every policy and account.
• Assuming a criminal acquittal settles the inheritance question. It does not. A probate court can reach the opposite conclusion under the lower civil standard and still bar an acquitted person from inheriting.
• Confusing the slayer rule with a no-contest clause. A no-contest clause deters frivolous will challenges. The slayer rule is a mandatory public policy rule that no clause in your will can override or waive — even if the will explicitly names the killer as beneficiary.
• Ignoring joint tenancy. Most people treat a jointly held home as "automatic" inheritance. The slayer rule severs that automatic right and sends the victim's half through the estate — where it may face probate, creditors, and delays.
• Overlooking fiduciary appointments. If your executor is also your primary beneficiary — common in married couples — you need a backup appointment. Courts appoint substitute administrators when the named executor is removed.
• Forgetting state borders. Real property follows the law of the state where it sits. A vacation home in California is governed by Cal. Prob. Code § 250 even if your primary residence is in Texas. Multi-state estates need legal guidance on which statute governs which asset class.

---

Sources

• Riggs v. Palmer, 115 N.Y. 506 (1889): https://law.justia.com/cases/new-york/court-of-appeals/1889/115-n-y-506-0.html
• Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Armstrong, 117 U.S. 591 (1886): https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/117/591/
• Uniform Probate Code § 2-803, Uniform Law Commission: https://www.uniformlaws.org/committees/community-home?CommunityKey=a539920d-c477-44b8-84fe-b0d7b1a4cca8
• California Probate Code §§ 250–259, California Legislature: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PROB&sectionNum=250.
• California Probate Code § 259 (elder abuse), FindLaw: https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/probate-code/prob-sect-259/
• Florida Statutes § 732.802, Florida Legislature: https://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799%2F0732%2FSections%2F0732.802.html
• Virginia Code §§ 64.2-2500–2515, Virginia General Assembly: https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title64.2/
• Michigan Compiled Laws § 700.2803, Michigan Legislature: https://www.legislature.mi.gov/Laws/MCL?objectName=MCL-700-2803
• LII / Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law — Slayer Rule: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/slayer_rule
• Wikipedia — Slayer Rule (history and state survey): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slayer_rule

This article is general information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction. Pactlio generates professional drafts for review — have a licensed attorney review anything important.